Hacker News Comments on
Can YOU Fix Climate Change?
Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell
·
Youtube
·
32
HN points
·
19
HN comments
- This course is unranked · view top recommended courses
Hacker News Stories and Comments
All the comments and stories posted to Hacker News that reference this video.One of my favorite channels on YouTube is Kurzgesagt and they recently (looking at date, well, last year - still recent in the scale of things) had a video on global warming - Can YOU Fix Climate Change? https://youtu.be/yiw6_JakZFcThere's also
Do we Need Nuclear Energy to Stop Climate Change? - https://youtu.be/EhAemz1v7dQ
Is It Too Late To Stop Climate Change? Well, it's Complicated. - https://youtu.be/wbR-5mHI6bo
The work probably has to be political, I agree with this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiw6_JakZFc
⬐ headsupernovaYes, politics is the arena now. The science is done, and I can personally attest to the hollowness of working to refine the precision of our understanding at this late stage in the fight. There are tech jobs in offset accounting, but that field is generally doing math on scams that justify continued emissions.Politics and propaganda are the buttons to push right now. Hopefully those will unlock other meaningful fields soon enough.
Exactly. If this Kurzgesagt video is to be believed, then the average road costs as much carbon to build PER METRE (!!) as it takes to produce one car:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiw6_JakZFc
Heavier vehicles like trucks (and EVs are heavier in general) cause much quicker degradation of roads. And doubling down on private vehicle use with EVs is going to increase demand for roads across the board. It's just so far from a useful solution to go down this route.
No.> The use of household carbon footprint calculators originated when oil producer BP hired Ogilvy to create an "effective propaganda" campaign to shift responsibility of climate change-causing pollution away from the corporations and institutions that created a society where carbon emissions are unavoidable and onto personal lifestyle choices.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_footprint
Kurzgesagt also provided a very good view on this that I agree with - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiw6_JakZFc - "Can YOU Fix Climate Change?" (No*). The video explains it much better than I could in a comment but if you're concerned about your own contribution, you're focusing on the wrong thing.
Kurzgesagt made a really good video about climate change [0].What stuck with me the most was that if I would eliminate 100% of my emissions in my entire life, I would save 1 second of global energy sector emissions.
I'm quite fond of the YouTube channel Kurzgesagt which has deep videos that are targeted at a "you don't need to be an expert in the subject to understand."There's a video on this subject - Can YOU Fix Climate Change? https://youtu.be/yiw6_JakZFc
You may also like A Selfish Argument for Making the World a Better Place – Egoistic Altruism https://youtu.be/rvskMHn0sqQ
>Cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin, the most-popular decentralized digital currency, have a notoriously large carbon footprint (bitcoin mining alone consumes about half as much electricity in a year as all of the UK). So to leverage a cheap source of energy to run their bitcoin mining operations, Lochmiller and Cavness found themselves partnering with oil companies to repurpose a byproduct, primarily methane, that’s typically vented or burnt off in flares.Aren't crypto miners using GPUs to "mine" bitcoins?
Doesn't that also mean every person who plays video games is also responsible for stressing the power generation system. And as GPUs become more powerful to give better frame rates and fancy tech like RTX, they also become more power hungry. Doesn't that also mean the massive data centers like the what Google is running for Stadia with massive number of GPUs is responsible for taxing the power generation system? Or people who train Deep Learning models with billion of parameters on GPUs? I do see people pointing fingers at Deep Learning and how it isn't "carbon neutral" but the other things are not really talked about.
That being said, I am not people/companies who use GPUs aren't the cause of global warming or are somehow singlehandedly making it worse I believe that as a society we are kind of involved in this. Finger pointing will really keep going in circles.
I am not the biggest fan of pop science as it often oversimplifies problems but this video by Kurzgesakt is very good as it explains what I am trying to say. https://youtu.be/yiw6_JakZFc
Kurzgesagt made a video about it, and they say, and I agree with them, the answer can only be political pressure: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiw6_JakZFcThey also mentioned the stat that if 1 person lived totally carbon neutral for 70 years, that would offset only 1 second of current global CO2 emissions, which I'm going to presume is sourced properly.
I'm not very optimistic. Politicians follow the polls and go with what's popular, and if the people living in the rich nations have to pay more to fly to Asia for cheap holidays, and iPhones, etc, get more expensive because of carbon tax, the majority probably won't support the governments and will instead vote in populist idiots that will make things "great again". In the poorer countries, being told that the decades-old luxuries they've envied from richer nations will cost more because of government policies will also not be popular, never mind that the policies are meant to save the future.
⬐ blablabla123> They also mentioned the stat that if 1 person lived totally carbon neutral for 70 years, that would offset only 1 second of current global CO2 emissions, which I'm going to presume is sourced properly.That's a strawman's argument and in theory would apply to anything in the context of overall society if it was true which is clearly not the case. Because if you really lived completely carbon neutral for decades, you'd probably appear in dozens of TV shows and magazines will have exclusive interviews for you. (Not sure if it's exactly NYT, but you'll sure attract interest) So other people see that and realize: wow, it's actually possible to survive for decades in a carbon neutral way.
In reality it wouldn't be that extreme but it's always a domino effect: your colleagues, friends and family see what you do and be at least lightly influenced by it. Be it just the fact that you do something that people thought would be not possible.
After all, that's how democracy works and how movements grow. It's not that your vote only depends on the campaigns but also on your peers' opinion. It's not that movements in the past haven't been succeeding.
⬐ AncalagonI'd argue this is demonstrably false if you include modern societies and even individuals that already greatly inconvenience themselves (or deny themselves in the first place) the ability to have large carbon footprints. The Amish come to mind but otherwise very orthodox religious societies and even some organic farmers you could argue are pretty carbon neutral. If anything they are the opposite of looked up to in pop culture.⬐ blablabla123⬐ bellyfullofbac> If anything they are the opposite of looked up to in pop culture.Maybe not by their own initiative but I mean there are countless YouTube videos among them and Amish versions of popular songs as well as Southpark and Family guy episodes depicting Amish life style. Our media has quite a bias towards extreme life styles...
I don't get how it's a strawman? I'll vote for the toughest pro-environmental policies and parties (but give us nuclear power as well!), but without economic pressures (so higher carbon/consumption tax) I won't change my behavior, because I think my effect will be negligible and I'd just be like the Amish, being pious while others enjoy. (Basically tragedy of the commons).⬐ blablabla123I mean in the US there are only 2 political parties over 1% anyway, so these policies cannot be very tough especially if these are without any pressure. It's quite an irony actually since the idea of a small state is so popular yet it's not being driven forward. On-and-off I'm since 15 years using private energy providers using exclusively solar, water and wind. It's a bit more expensive but negligible compared to other expenses.> I won't change my behavior, because I think my effect will be negligible and I'd just be like the Amish, being pious while others enjoy.
Well yes, but this is what I mean, the Amish have an effect. Yet I don't think it's not necessary to live like an Amish. Probably it's fine to just pick the next pricier product. A few percent extra paid don't hurt, have a good effect and will promote these products both towards sellers and other buyers.
"Public transit is not attractive because its not point-to-point, and you have no control over the other passengers on your ride. Autonomous minibusses with demand-driven routes, private subscriptions, and passenger reviews are the solution. "They are not the solution, we cannot support this many cars even if they are all EV's. We also cannot support thia mich meat in our diet. The sooner people can accept that, the less pain it will be in the long run.
Also, how much do you have to hate public thanspor that you'd rather rise a totally unsafe and uncomfortable electric scooter than take a tram?
That's nice, but the unfortunate thing is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiw6_JakZFcIt's a Kurzgesagt video about why individual action is far from enough, and why we need systemic action. Do your part, but also pressure politicians, because that's where the main pain point is.
⬐ jsilenceWell yes, do both, do your thing and pressure politicians. still no need to wait for the politicians.I just loath people putting the blame on politicians, China, capitalism or some sort of world cabal just to have a rationale to continue their own unsustainable style of living.
Try one of the latest Kurzgesagt videos if you haven't already. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiw6_JakZFc
Kurzgesagt: Can YOU Fix Climate Change? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiw6_JakZFcLink in response to people asking what everyone is doing, should be doing, and can be doing...
⬐ SyonykHow about "not a video that uses a ton of energy and bandwidth" form links?
Kurzgesagt uploaded a video about this recently. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiw6_JakZFc
Only in aggregation when everyone else changes their behaviour as well. Each individuals contribution is too tiny to have an impact, which is why we need a systematic change or legislation, so that its no longer a choice/personal responsibility to take action.Kurzgesagt's recent video (sponsored by bill gates notes)e xpressed the issue much better then I ever could, so i'll only link to it here.
⬐ ZenstYou are spot on.It's a bit like most changes, they take time and sure my impact akin to a grain of sand in a desert, but then I feel comfortable with my choices and eventually over time, such choices will become less open as there will get a time in which government will act.
I'm mindful that many when it comes to change that is impaction can be a case of they don't so why should I and well I don't have too so I can do what I like and the pandemic as been most insightful into such mindsets. Hence we saw laws to enforces common sense in situations that had the people all been responsible, would not of been needed or come to pass. Hence I do expect the whole fossil/fuel/resource aspect of human consumption to become more and more regulated in years to come. Will it be done right is the question or will we just see those who can afford to be feckless, just as enabled as currently.
That's why I agree with you upon this and do foresee that legislation may well be the only way - alas the issue is global and that is a real cruz as when as countries tend to act as individuals and cases of - well they're not so why should we and other unfair arguments play out. So as always the politics becomes more an issue than the issue the politics is trying to solve.
⬐ dalyClimate change won't be fixed.
Seriously, I would never have expected that somebody would unironically go on and compare VW with Ferrari.You literally have no idea what Ferarri is and what they do and where they do it and how they hire their employees. Their cars are almost exclusively hand-made and everybody who works at Ferrari is proud to do so, yes, even the dude mowing the grass - this is not cheap to maintain. There are people there whose skills can't be translated to building electric cars - which are really just oversized RC cars. There are people there who are experts in engines - and those will be laid off. In fact, everybody working on engines at Ferrari would be laid off. And those are a lot of people.
The ICE is something that deserves to go on in something special like a Ferrari. This whole electric cars debacle makes me wish the planet would be blown up by aliens sooner before we all roll around in crappy BMW i3 lookalikes because there's nothing else available and there is no choice albeit industry is polluting several degrees of magnitude more than just ICE cars[1]. And certainly so in the case of a small italian sports cars manufacturer that yields true works of art, poetry on wheels.
By comparison, VW is a tech giant who can afford to mass produce their stuff and will not suffer nor will they have to lay off a significant percentage of their staff.
Video reference [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiw6_JakZFc
⬐ peoplefromibizaI know this is not reddit and I will gladly accept downvotes, but you nailed it!That's what I was trying to talk about.
There are things that deserve to be preserved, like we do with our artistic heritage, Ferrari's ICEs are one of them.
⬐ urthorI think this is the fundamental disagreement.Preserving the ICE is like preserving the cigarette. The cigarette's place in classic culture, in classic movies and nightlife, is profound.
Doesn't make me sympathetic one little bit. Petrol engines, cigarettes, it's fundamentally unhealthy, get rid of it.
If Ferrari is unwilling to convert to electric automobiles, then Ferrari can go the way of Marlborough.
⬐ peoplefromibiza> Preserving the ICE is like preserving the cigaretteThat's a silly comparison IMO
Ferrari engines are not dangerous for anybody
Anyway, human life is unhealthy for the rest of the World, would you get rid of that too?
Ask mega fauna if you disagree.
> then Ferrari can go the way of Marlborough.
So much nonsensical bitterness...
You know that every car is made of toxic products and they can't stop using them, in your opinion is it more unhealthy 2 thousands Ferrari every year or millions of Volkswagen, their tires and motor/brake oil (which are highly toxic)
Should we get rid of VolksWagen too?
Dogmas are stupid.
⬐ urthorWe cannot solve every problem right away.But constantly improving, in many small ways, and chipping away at issues is how we make the world a better place.
Certainly I think phasing out ICEs, especially on public roads, is essential.
The Ferrari business model of producing highly polluting sports cars, when there are far more efficient electric models that can run on wind power, is not a positive direction to be traveling in.
⬐ ThePowerOfDirgeConsidering that Italy will be hit hard by climate change, I find this a weird opinion to hold for an Italian. Last thing I heard there's no garbage pickup in the capital city in Rome, so these Ferrari companies must somehow forgot to pay their taxes a lot or?
Kurzgesagt uploaded a video two days ago about climate change: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiw6_JakZFcFighting plastic packaging is one of the environmental issues that get an unreasonable amount of attention.
It is more "look we did something" than "look we actually make an impact"
⬐ snarf21This is what happened with the straws kerfuffle. We are absolutely willing to give up things that we don't care much about. Like what is alluded to, we don't really want to have to consume less, which would have far reaching consequences beyond plastic.⬐ ghuinSo like covid restrictions.⬐ sp332The article doesn't mention climate change.⬐ bjt2n3904The progressive mindset is more and more dominated by the politicians syllogism: "We must do something! This is something, therefore we must do it!"Progress has no feedback loop, either, which combined with the above is a recipe for disaster.
It's like software code churn. A bunch of git commits must indicate we're really getting some serious work done!
⬐ gruez⬐ cmrdporcupine>It's like software code churn. A bunch of git commits must indicate we're really getting some serious work done!Is this seriously a thing? ie. people refactoring stuff for the sake of refactoring? Maybe the company I work at hasn't progressed to that stage yet, but the type of "change for the sake of change" that you're talking about I mostly see with designs/layouts.
⬐ bjt2n3904⬐ melenaboijaI'm not sure how much of a thing it is now, but managers would use github/lab metics to measure productivity.Any metric that becomes a stand in for success will be gamed.
Oh yeah, because the conservative one is not all about "we have to do something".Progressist use plastic bags and conservative migration.
⬐ cmrdporcupineNice strawman you got there, shame if something were to happen to it.Fighting plastic packaging is not about climate change.It's about pollution and waste and environmental damage generally.
Not sure why people keep getting this confused.
⬐ xorfishHow big is the problem with plastic in developed countries with functioning waste management?Does the use of plastic reduce food waste?
⬐ onemoresoopExactly this! Plastic doesn't break down and ends up polluting the environment for a really long time.⬐ radu_floricicaI'm not really clear on the whole downside part.Pollution? It comes from underground, does something useful, gets buried again.
Waste? Uhh... It may "feel" wasteful, because it's more durable than paper, but if it's both cheaper and better than paper, I don't really see the issue. Plus if I want to pay to buy something, it's kinda by definition useful.
Environmental damage from fruit & vegetable plastic packaging. Again, not clear on the how. Plastic is very chemically inert to the point of being used as food packaging. It may at worst be visually unappealing in the wrong context, but that's a disposal issue.
And please, please, for the love of all that is still logical, don't tell me about plastic in oceans. A ban on packaging in Spain will do absolutely nothing about how municipal waste is disposed of in Africa and Asia. Both wrong problem and wrong continent.
⬐ formerly_provenThere is a scientific illiteracy angle to a lot of the Green talking points. Plastics is a good example (many think all plastics contain plasticizers, all plastics this, all plastics that), I probably don't need to say a word about nuclear anything, and of course the general notion of personal responsibility and impact. To me it seems like the movement has been very successfully derailed, or rather redirected, towards largely irrelevant, ineffective or meaningless issues, and in some cases even directly benefiting industries (think of electric cars :) The fact that the idea of the carbon footprint has been popularized by British Petrol speaks to this; I expect we'll learn in the future that many of today's Green talking points were planted by various industries in an effort to misdirect.(I'm not denying climate change or anything, it's a very real and increasingly huge issue that needs to be addressed, however, even the Green's party is largely dedicated to Looking Green not Being Green.)
You are not representing the seriousness of this situation adequately (in my opinion).This excellent cartoon video explains the seriousness of all the lesser known sources of carbon: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiw6_JakZFc
Seems like Chairman Xi is serious about tackling Climate Change so he does not get deposed if the Gobi desert grows and eventually swallows up half of China.
Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshelldid a great video on this earlier today
⬐ fspacefYes U can it’s a question of will power.⬐ CountHackulusSad but extremely realistic.⬐ ttonkytonkIncredible, considering all the know-it-all geniuses here at HN. Surely they have the solution and just aren't telling us, presumably waiting for when it will be most profitable to announce.